Arshdeep Singh @ Arsh vs State of Punjab

VIRINDER AGGARWAL, J. (Oral)

The present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 439 Cr.P.C.), seeking grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.137 dated 02.06.2025, registered under Sections 21-B, 21-C, 27-A, 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, at Police Station Gate Hakima, District Amritsar.

As per the prosecution version, on 02.06.2025, the police party was conducting patrol duty and searching for suspicious persons. When the police reached near the water tank situated close to Radha Krishan Colony, a person carrying a plastic polythene was allegedly apprehended, from whose possession 220 grams of heroin was recovered. On the basis of the said recovery, the present FIR was registered under the provisions of the NDPS Act. During investigation, co-accused Karandeep Singh @ Karan was nominated in the case and, on the basis of his disclosure statement, the petitioner was subsequently nominated on 06.06.2025. It is alleged that Karandeep Singh disclosed that he used to receive and supply consignments of heroin to co-accused Gurmeet Singh @ Geetu at the instance of the petitioner and drug smugglers based in Pakistan. Pursuant to the disclosure statement of Karandeep Singh, a further recovery of 802 grams of heroin was allegedly effected from the place disclosed by him. It is further alleged that while lodged in Goindwal Sahib Jail, Karandeep Singh came into contact with the petitioner, who allegedly facilitated his contact with Pakistan-based drug smugglers through virtual numbers and thereby enabled him to deal in and supply heroin consignments at different locations. The prosecution further relies upon the disclosure statement allegedly suffered by the petitioner after he was brought on production warrant, wherein he is stated to have disclosed his connection with Karandeep Singh and the Pakistan-based drug smugglers. The petitioner has been in custody since 06.06.2025. The challan has been presented and the trial is pending.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and that the alleged recovery of 220 grams of heroin was effected from co-accused Karandeep Singh and not from the petitioner. It is submitted that the further recovery of 802 grams of heroin was also effected pursuant to the disclosure statement of the said co-accused and nothing incriminating has been recovered from the petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner was nominated subsequently on the basis of disclosure statements of the co-accused and his own disclosure statement made in police custody is inadmissible in evidence. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 06.06.2025, the challan has already been presented and no prosecution witness has been examined so far. It is also submitted that co-accused Gurmeet Singh @ Geetu, similarly placed, has already been granted regular bail. On these grounds, learned counsel prays for grant of regular bail to the petitioner.

Notice of motion.

Ms. Navreet Kaur, AAG, Punjab, has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent-State and has filed the custody certificate dated 02.09.2026, which is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. As per the custody certificate, the petitioner has already undergone a total custody period of 01 year 02 months and 22 days.

Learned State counsel opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature, as he is alleged to be involved in the supply and trafficking of heroin through Pakistan-based drug smugglers and was nominated during investigation on the basis of material collected by the investigating agency and his alleged connection with co-accused Karandeep Singh, from whose disclosure a further recovery of 802 grams of heroin was effected.

Be that as it may, considering the custody period already undergone by the petitioner, i.e. 01 year, 02 months and 22 days, and the fact that the investigation stands completed, challan has been presented before the learned Trial Court, charges have already been framed, and none of the prosecution witnesses have been examined so far, it is evident that the trial is likely to take some time to reach its logical conclusion. The alleged recovery of 220 grams of heroin is admittedly not of commercial quantity. Further, the petitioner is sought to be connected with the alleged recovery primarily on the basis of the disclosure statements of the co-accused, and no recovery has been effected from his personal possession. The petitioner is in custody since 06.06.2025 and co-accused Gurmeet Singh @ Geetu, stated to be similarly placed, has already been granted regular bail. This Court is of the considered opinion that further incarceration of the petitioner would not serve any useful purpose.

Reliance is placed upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Dataram Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, 2018 (2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 131, wherein it has been held that grant of bail is the rule and refusal thereof is an exception, and that a person is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty. It is further submitted that the right to speedy trial forms an integral part of the right to life and personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, and the same has been consistently recognised by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, including in Balwinder Singh v. State of Punjab & Another (SLO (Crl.) No. 8523/2024). In these circumstances, continued incarceration of the petitioner would serve no useful purpose, particularly when the trial can be effectively safeguarded by imposing appropriate conditions.

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed, and the petitioner is ordered to be admitted on regular bail, subject to furnishing requisite bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned/Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, as the case may be, and further subject to the following conditions:-